Interesting dilemma, one that touches me as I have left an organization that I was part of for twenty years, a partner for sixteen. I left for what appeared to be a decent offer,and turns out to have been a fantastic one.

My former firm was fantastic to work for twenty years ago, great up until about eight or nine years ago, when the CEO lost his edge, and began to dabble in interests well outside the pruview of the primary focus of the firm. The economic debt that has been embraced is staggering, although like the proverbial elephant in the living room, has not been overtly discussed. In fact, the firm claims to be healthy and vibrant, despite defaulting on consultant payments, having company cars repossessed for non-paymejnt and running as long as six to eight weeks to pay employee expense statements. As a partner, I felt I could be part of a "change managemetn" but that works only when the organiation wants to change. Finally, I succumbed to the blandishments of a clever headhunter, and began a six-month courting dance that culminated in my leaving my old firm. For me, the balance was between a sense of loyalty and a sense of self-care. Ultimately, self-care, in the form of a stable financial organiztion, in the form of a vibrant workplace, in the form of intelligent colleagues who really want critical and compelling dialogue about our work product.......

So, LW might do well to pose some compelling questions (I found these useful in leaving my old organization):

Can LW influence the future of the current organiation in a way that will create fiscal stability? The place can be a laughing riot, but if the end destination is bankruptcy, padlocks on the door, etc, that part will be less than amusing.

Can LW sort out, define and isolate the reasons why the firm is doing poorly? And, if LW can, can those issues be dealt with, or are they endemic/structural flaws? (Small organizations are frequently driven by personalty, and this may mean taking a look at the personality of the CEO, and understanding what drives him, and what is flawed about his approach. This is not IBM or GE, this is a very small skiff in troubled waters, and if the captain can't sail, then........)My guess is that LW can define three or four critical "structural flaws" that are driving the non-success of the organization. Once isolated, LW needs to determine whether they can be fixed, and even if the CEO wants to fix them.

Can LW place LW's own loyalty in the balance with the implicit contract of loyalty on the part of her employer, that the employer will render a fiscally sound environment on an ongoing basis? (Sounds like this question is already answered.....)

I suspect, given the givens, that answering the above questions will only be a form of "due diligence' for LW, in which LW can begin to more specifically quantify the challenges of the current organization. Once LW has the answers, then a direction can be formed, and a departure can be crafted.

I note that my departure came as a massive shock, and a radical display of disloyalty. The CEO was enraged, my immediate reporting boss was embarassed and ashamed, and the final conduct of my departure is now in the hands of an attorney. A number of colleagues were devastated by my departure, and as happens in this situation, a number are following suit, prepping resumes, contacting headhunters, and preparing to leave. My departure is estimated by one of my former colleagues as costing the firm between $1M and $2M in net revenues per year. Ultimately, I concluded that my loyalty to the organization had not been matched by the organization's loyalty to me, in no small part due measured by the fiscal incompetence that seems to have taken over as a management style.

In my departure, the CEO now thinks I'm a turncoat, my former boss would prefer to think of me as dead, and my friendships with colleagues that I care about are even stronger.

LW needs to be responsible, not to to the organization first, but to LW's own need (hardly unique) for a fiscally stable professional setting that can truly magnify and exploit (in the most positive sense of the word) LW's true skillsets.

Time to analyze, process and pack up.